Sunday, June 4, 2017

US Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer: A Presentation on International...

Our Foreign Affairs Constitution: The President, Congress, and the Makin...

Criminal Justice Reform: What Values Should Take Priority in Criminal Ju...

States agree to develop an international regulatory framework on private military and security companies




"x x x.

States agree to develop an international regulatory framework on private military and security companies

On 24 May 2017, States at the UN reached an agreement to prepare an “international regulatory framework” to protect human rights and ensure accountability for violations and abuses relating to the activities of private military and private security companies (PMSCs).

The agreement, reached at Working Group level, has still to be ratified by the full UN Human Rights Council.

It would be the first universal international instrument on human rights and private security companies negotiated and adopted at the UN.

This could pave the way to further developments towards increased monitoring and accountability of the private security industry.

The agreement constitutes a landmark achievement. The intergovernmental Working Group over the past six years have been mired in circular debates as to whether or not it is desirable to develop a legally binding instrument on PMSCs.

Last’s week agreement leaves aside for the moment the decision about the nature of the instrument and will instead allow for a constructive focus on the contents of the future instrument.

Activities of private and military security companies became the object of heightened international scrutiny particularly after events in the context of the armed conflict in Iraq over the past decade.

These include unlawful killings at Nisoor Square and torture and ill-treatment at Abu Graib prison.

A Working Group of experts on mercenary activity appointed by the UN Human Rights Council started to look at the issues in 2007, generating proposals for international instruments to fill perceived regulatory gaps.

Many States have now accepted that the absence of an international regulatory framework combined with limited or non-existent regulation at national level offers a “breeding ground” for human rights abuses committed by PMSCs.

The main clients of these companies are governments that contract them to carry out specific functions, including some that many believe should remain firmly in the hands of public officials.

One key issue that the future instrument should address is the circumstances under which PMSCs can be considered to act on behalf of the State when they are contracted to perform functions that are typically State functions.

International law already governs some aspects of PMSC activity. International human rights law provides for a general obligation of States to protect against the adverse consequences of PMSC activity.

There has also been other international regulatory activity outside of UN auspices in this area.

In 2008 a select group of mostly Western States led by the Government of Switzerland and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) elaborated the Montreux Document on pertinent obligations for States regarding PMSCs.

Other initiatives such as a Code of Conduct for the PMSCs themselves followed suit. But many States and civil society organizations regard these initiatives as insufficient and lacking the universality afforded by UN processes.

One notable weakness in current approaches is the dearth of standards and mechanisms squarely addressing accountability of private security industry and to ensure access to remedy for those victims of abuse.

Experience shows that States legal frameworks have limited effectiveness when abuses occur at the cross-border level, involving more than one company in more than one jurisdiction, especially in conflict or post-conflict environments.

The prospective international regulatory framework should surely build on existing initiatives, research and findings.

To that end, broad participation by all stakeholders should be ensured.

In this regard, participation of civil society and NGOs specialized in human rights has not been optimal so far.

States leading this new process should make all and every effort to fill that gap, ensuring that international and national civil society receive timely information and facilities for meaningful participation.

x x x."

Egypt: repeal draconian NGO law and protect the right to freedom of association



"x x x.

Egypt: repeal draconian NGO law and protect the right to freedom of association

The ICJ today called on the Egyptian authorities to act immediately to repeal the law on civic associations.

The law was adopted by Egypt’s Parliament on 15 November 2016 and signed into law by President El-Sisi on 29 May 2017.

Until the law is repealed, the authorities should desist from enforcing it, the ICJ says.

The law effectively prohibits most Egyptian human rights non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from registering and working in Egypt, stipulating that civic associations’ work shall take place in the fields of development and social welfare consistent with “the State’s plans and its developmental needs and priorities.”

Egyptian and international NGOs are also forbidden to advocate against any law or its implementation, as well as to carry out “political activities” or any that “harm national security, public order, public morals or public health.”

They are prohibited from conducting public surveys, research or reports without permission and approval of the results of such work must be given by the authorities prior to publication (articles 14, 87).

The law also provides for an entity to be formed by presidential decree from representatives of three security bodies, which will decide on all matters related to NGO funding, the registration and issues relating to the work of international NGOs, and cooperation between Egyptian associations and any foreign body.

“The law on civic associations, if implemented in its present form, would be tantamount to an official death certificate of independent civil society in Egypt,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Director.

“By signing it into law, President El-Sisi is silencing the very organizations that could act as a check on the abusive and arbitrary exercise of his power,” he added.

The adoption of this repressive law is just the latest measure in a sustained, relentless campaign by Egypt’s military and executive authorities aimed at dismantling Egyptian civil society through highly politicized judicial proceedings and arbitrary travel bans against NGOs and human rights defenders.

For instance, the foreign funding case taken against NGOs (no. 173/2011) saw leading Egyptian human rights organizations, such as the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS), the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (ANHRI) and the Hicham Mubrak Law Center (HMLC), subject to arbitrary investigations.

The grounds included “receiving funds to harm national interests and destroy the basic foundations of the state (the army, police, and judiciary),” “establishing an entity operating as a civic association without official registration,” and “income tax evasion.”

Four of these organizations and six NGO directors/board members have been subjected to asset freezes.

In the last two months, many NGO staff and directors have been summoned for interrogation by investigative judges, including ICJ partners Mustapha El-Hassan, Director of HMLC, Gamel Eid, Founder and Director of ANHRI, and Mohamed Zaree, CIHRS’ Programme Director and short-listed candidate for the Martin Ennals Award 2017.

The ICJ has previously documented how the Egyptian authorities have used the justice system as a repressive tool in their efforts to silence many of those suspected of opposing them.

“Egyptian authorities must comply with their obligations under international law and put an immediate end to their campaign to silence human rights defenders and NGOs. A first step in that direction would be the immediate repeal of the law on civic associations,” Benarbia said.

Contact

Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 22 979 38 17: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

x x x."

Human Rights Lecture - Australian Exceptionalism

International Law and the Use of Force

The Law & Transgender in America

Parents in Prison: Collateral Consequences

The Executive Branch Shouldn't Legislate | Rand Paul on REINS Act